Back in November, the US government's Office of Science and Technology Policy solicited comments on potential policy surrounding public access to scholarly work. All comments were accepted through January 12 and were recently released.
The statement released by the American Anthropological Association can be read here, and the Archaeological Institute of America statement is here. In short, both statements insist that there is no problem with public access to scholarly output.
The anthro-Twitter-verse, where there has been a long and interesting discussion on open access science, was immediately up in arms. Anthropology bloggers have started posting, critiquing and condeming the AAA/AIA responses:
![]()
![]()
The statement released by the American Anthropological Association can be read here, and the Archaeological Institute of America statement is here. In short, both statements insist that there is no problem with public access to scholarly output.
The anthro-Twitter-verse, where there has been a long and interesting discussion on open access science, was immediately up in arms. Anthropology bloggers have started posting, critiquing and condeming the AAA/AIA responses:
- Neuroanthropology: AAA Takes Public Stand Against Open Access
- Savage Minds: AAA Response about Public Access to Scholarly Publications; How do we mobilize anthropologists to support open access?
- Publishing Archaeology: AAA Joins the Dark Side of the Force
- Dienekes' Anthropology Blog: The AAA Opposes Open Science
- Doug's Archaeology: AAA Fail! This Time on an Epic Scale; Why This #AAAFail is Epic
I'm pretty amazed at how narrowly the AAA defines "public" in their statement. I thought that, as anthropologists, our public was, well, everyone. Many of the bloggers above have already made cogent remarks that mirror my own views on open access science, so I'll end with a brief anecdote.
Anthropology graduate programs frequently take 10 years to complete. At many institutions, funding is only available for a portion of that. Graduate students drop out. They do fieldwork and write their dissertations while not enrolled, to save on the cost of tuition that is not covered by any research grants they might have, then they re-enroll to graduate. Since grad students obtain access to journals primarily through their graduate institution, dropping out means losing access to scholarly work in the field and even during the writing phase. Most of us position ourselves near an institute of higher learning while we're writing - either our own or one at which we are adjuncting - because we know that it is imperative to have up-to-date information on our field. But access to anthropological knowledge is not a given for these researchers.
It's problematic that the AAA doesn't recognize the problems that many grad students have accessing published research. It shows that, as an organization, they are out of touch with the growing body of not just scholars-in-training, but also adjuncts and independent researchers.
I support open science, and I encourage you to do the same. If you have thoughts on the topic, click through to the Savage Minds posts above and leave suggestions.
